-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EDGE #278 - Bloodborne
- Thread starter Boy Wander
- Start date
Thought I heard something around 40-45GB before
The reviews say otherwise. They aren't polarising at all. It looks to me like a lot of people are stuck on the hype train.
kojirosasaki
Banned
I remind all that Edge gave The Witcher with 5 ¿Do you also you agree with this note?
Hibiki Kurosawa
Member
Oh sweet, there's a bit on Alexander O' Smith! I want to read that.
Mr. Poolman
Member
Well it seems you are against the tide on this one. Since most reviewers and a lot of people who played complained on mediocre gameplay.
You can find examples on this very thread.
You are complaining that Edge's 4 is due to trolling or "have no idea videogames", because on your personal perspective presentation is as big a factor as gameplay on deciding of liking it or not.
AsfaeksBR
Member
kojirosasaki
Banned
I have my own judgment and is the only one that I guided after more than 30 years playing video games.
There is also a huge tide of people that the game has seemed wonderful. And for me the opinion of any player in a forum like this has the same weight as the opinion of the player that works on Edge.
Mr. Poolman
Member
This is a fine and wise position.
But why complain on Edge's score if it holds no value to you?
kojirosasaki
Banned
Because it is a medium that unfortunately still many people like the note was written in sacred stone. And note that this media and others may lead to ever see sequels of games that can improve even more. For example Uncharted for the first part of the second.
I am totally disagreement the notes in video games. And I think it's wonderful that web as eurogamer has taken the first step in eliminating them.
Chilled_Eskim01
Member
Then why do you seem to care so much that the game got the score it did? For chrissake, we get it. A publication, which you obviously don't seem care for, gave a game you like a, and I quote from their own grarding rubric, 4: a "DISSAPOINTING" rating.
They didn't say it was shite, they didn't say it was the worst game ever, and they even showed that there was some merit in the production value. They simply said it was dissapointing.
Can we move on now?
I think the Bloodborne reviews are going to be a bloodbath (excuse the pun.)
I think...
1/3 = Disappointed reviewers complaining about aspects of Dark Souls that are not a part of Bloodborne because they can't see past the fact it's a new IP.
1/3 = Flat out 10/10s full of hyperbole, regardless of the game's possible shortcomings, full of hype.
1/3 = Normal reviews that hardcore fans will disagree with.
I think the Souls series is becoming harder and harder to review as hardcore fans are too invested in the series to make objective observations.
It's going to be much better for players to just ignore scores and play the game themselves and think what they want to think.
I think...
1/3 = Disappointed reviewers complaining about aspects of Dark Souls that are not a part of Bloodborne because they can't see past the fact it's a new IP.
1/3 = Flat out 10/10s full of hyperbole, regardless of the game's possible shortcomings, full of hype.
1/3 = Normal reviews that hardcore fans will disagree with.
I think the Souls series is becoming harder and harder to review as hardcore fans are too invested in the series to make objective observations.
It's going to be much better for players to just ignore scores and play the game themselves and think what they want to think.
unapersson
Member
I think the comments about mediocre game play say more about the player than the game.
It may be an interesting exercise to try and prove that with some captured video. Though this isn't the thread for it. Maybe one for discussion in the OT some time, wouldn't mind doing some deconstruction of the game play.
AntiFacebook
Member
WTF? what an awful magazine
In what case that is not the best?
Ravensmash
Member
Does it matter if I agree with their review wholeheartedly? I'm not reading a review for a fact based analysis.
KoruptData
Member
I never played a Souls game. Hard games turn me off. Just now I traded in The Order and put all the money towards Bloodborne preorder. I figure what the hell. I'll have MLB as a companion game and my next single player experience will be Batman. Bring the pain!
kojirosasaki
Banned
Totally agree
Well,this tells us pretty much everything about the score.
I think it´s a 9/10 or a perfect score.
razgriz417
Member
So pretty much like any 1st party exclusive game?
My fucking God, are people still complaining about a number from a review they haven't even read?
Get over it.
Get over it.
I think you really need to work on your haruspicy.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
KefkaPalazzo
Member
But the Order got low scores from a ton of places, unlike the Witcher. It's not like they are going against the norm here.
Those Bloodborne details somehow managed to get me even more excited, hopefully the pre load is up soon.
Poop!
Member
I'd say it's more like a 7-10 with the majority of sites that use a 1-10... or supposed to use it. EDGE is the only one that uses the entire scale accurately.
my hair is spicy enough, thanks
Oh my god, so we might be getting non-press impressions soon. Good, good.
Barkley's Justice
Member
Yea that's how journalism and print lead times work, guy...
Did he seriously write "dribble"?
Have you seen Dark Souls II's critical reception? If that game can get as high of praise as it did, I have no doubt that Bloodborne will be able to match it.
OneOneSeven
Banned
That's a bit much.
That's hyperbole on the other end of the spectrum. Just as bad as the people who say it's great or fantastic.
It's definitely playable. It's just an extremely mediocre game, especially when compared to other third person shooters.
People often say that the opinions of random internet posters hold as much weight as reviewers. That's only when they are being told what they want to hear from the group that feels the same as they do. As it turns out, the opinions of other random people who feel differently don't really mean as much.
Reviewers aren't rushing out to buy games on day one. There is a clear distinction between someone being given something and someone spending their own money on something they are already invested in.
So no, I will never trust the opinions of random internet forum guy. Their opinions aren't as valid. Especially when it's an exclusive and even more so when their opinions are completely against the grain. So when someone on this forum says that The Order is a great or fantastic game, I know their opinion means nothing.
Bloodbrone will be the same. People in this thread are already saying that it will score as well as Dark Souls 2. Not sure why that matters, but apparently it does. There will definitely be people bitching and moaning if it scores lower on metacritic. Those people will also be complaining on launch day or a day after. When there is obviously no way they could have finished the game or experienced as much as reviewers have.
I don't really know how anyone can make that statement. I'm a huge fan of the souls games, but some of the magic was definitely lost from Dark Souls 1 to Dark souls 2. A lot of people seem to think that. So for people to now go ahead and assume that Bloodborne will be the best thing ever seems a little ridiculous.
I'm cautiously optimistic, but it's a pretty big departure in terms of game design and combat. At least compared to the Souls games. Yes, they have a solid track record and I am going to get it on launch day, but if by some chance it absolutely bombs critically, I'm willing to give it a shot because of what they've done in the past. They've earned that.
Mr. Poolman
Member
You think?
I think this is a rather different situation than a game like Dark Souls, which the player must "get" to find deep enjoyment.
Alcoholikaust
Member
Who needs video? I'll break down an enemy encounter for you. They don't all go this way, but you can see it often.
I come to the end of a narrow street. The street opens into a small courtyard. 4 enemies emerge. I take cover behind a box. My partner AI is standing behind 2 double stacked boxes. As I assess the situation, my partner AI is unloading his entire inventory of ammunition into the top box in front of him. At this point I'm pretty sure that top box is no threat to us anymore. My AI partner disagrees...of course.
Back to the enemy. Two AI are upright strafing out in the open between no cover in front of me to no cover in the corner of the courtyard on my right. I laugh, I proceed to pop up and drop these two geniuses.
Now for the last two guys. They seem to be smarter. They took cover at the other side of the courtyard and are laying down heavy fire on my position.
That box is apparently clinging to life so no cover fire from my AI partner.
I want to move forward to the closest stone wall quickly while maintaining cover. Wait...I can't...this mechanic that is in many great 3rd person shooters isn't even there.
I run ahead and take cover. For some reason the rightmost guy decides his good cover was too good and now walks towards me while firing. I pop out and drop him. The fourth AI is now moving back and forth between 2 stone walls. He can't decide which he likes more. I give him time to decide. I think I'll just grenade his tail. I toss a grenade. It lands almost on top of him. In a panick he moves a safe 3 feet to a box to his left...poor guy.
/scene
On the topic of Bloodborne, I expect good scores and a long game that fans will love.
Chilled_Eskim01
Member
If I have read your statement wrong, feel free to tell me, but please do not attempt to passive-aggressively insult players (myself included) who found the game to feel lackluster.
If you feel that players who found it mediocre due to having experience in similar games of the genre, please state as much so that these types of (possible) misunderstandings do not arise.
duckielein
Banned
Hm, can't find the Cover to be honest .. woud someone give me a link or sth.? (=
unapersson
Member
I just feel that there are lots of encounters in the game and people are singling in on the more restricted combat areas to prove the gameplay is mediocre (along with binders of reviews to back them up), while there are lots of more open areas where you have a lot more ways to approach them and where gameplay is more fluid and dynamic. Those were the areas I enjoyed the most but a lot of people seem to pretend they don't even exist.
Personally I liked the mix of restricted/open environments, with shooting/stealth segments, but I can perfectly understand why other people wouldn't. The issues I had weren't with action gameplay segments, but with the relatively static environments and path finding during the exploration parts.
SmartWaffles
Member
I always think DSII gets high scores because the press was afraid of criticizing Souls series after the first two games. You hate Souls games? You are casual and not cool. It is a good game for sure but doesn't deserve 9-10 across the board.
entremet
Member
It was a simple generic game that looked fancy.
It's their opinion just like your own and mine.
Edge gave Destiny an 8, and wrote one of the more spot-on reviews for it. I have not observed any tendency for them to dog pile. Often then go the other direction.
Maastricht
Member
With 82 reviews metacritic is 6.5, and user reviews is 6.7. Only 8 of those reviews are outwardly negative, and Edge is among the lower ones of those (same score as Giant Bomb, I might add), even taking into account that they score 1.0 lower on average, they're still 1.5 below that. So statistically ...
Anyway, Bloodborne. Clearly a longer game than The Order.
Anyway, Bloodborne. Clearly a longer game than The Order.
Chilled_Eskim01
Member
You're talking about the encounter environments instead of the actual encounters, so I will speak to that first. The environments where you could move around would have been better utilized if there was some form of agency for the player to actually... you know... move around. Instead, the AI is content to sling several shotgunners at you, which were priority to pick off, and then allow the player to sit back and pick the others from distance. If you get hit or downed, you either restarted and do it all over again with no variation in tactics, or used the black water to inta-heal yourself and be right as rain. It was mediocre.
Now for the actual gameplay, as that is what most are talking about when I talk to them about how the game felt.
1.) Player movement is restricted for the majority of the game, which brings most encounters to a 'stop-and-pop' shooting gallery, which could be fun if there was something inventive or new to the mix, but it's the standard Gears formula we've all seen for years now. The problem is, Gears had running mid-fights and tactical rolls [read: dodging] that allowed for more traversal options.
2.) "Why did they take the cool guns away?" I was talking to my brother about this the other day, and he asked me this question. He was referring, specifically, to the thermite rifle. He stated he had held back from using all the ammo so he could keep it a little longer, but then the next cut-scene has the player using the thermite rounds to melt a rock. Then you're stuck with the boring assault rifle that every single shooter has ever. The game doesn't allow for free form arsenal management, but rather sticks to a very formulaic "here's a cool gun to use for this scene, and this scene only" pattern that is restricting and bothersome.
3.) There's nothing new. Nothing. You move like you always do. You can't run because the game won't let you, it wants you to look at pretty thing #293. The slow-mo effect has been done before (albiet less flashy, I guess) in plenty of other games. The standard guns are... well, standard.
So please, do go on how folks don't understand the brilliance of the game and it *us* who can't appreciate it's intricacies, rather than the game being mediocre. I guess we're just not worthy enough for it.
But hey, It sure looks pretty.
You're right to look at overall reviews and the statistical distribution, but most review threads devolve into accusations of ulterior motives.
If people are going to dismiss Edge giving the same score to Dark Souls 2 as they did for Dark Souls and Demon's Souls out of pandering to the Souls community, then they should at least be consistent and be skeptical of their Bloodborne coverage rather than flooding onto the hype train.
Well, Dark Souls 2 didn't get 9s and 10s across the board, so okay! It's roughly the same statistical distribution as the two previous games, with a slightly higher skew probably coming from a few balance/accessibility concessions the game made (which honestly weren't that many), or even statistical noise or sampling bias (those that were not as enthused about Dark Souls 1 may have refrained from reviewing the sequel).
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
Check your PMs.